Group 9 Mid-Term (Hamza Syed, Ana Bravo, Yann Herve)

psychology-mid-term

 

 

 

 

(Professor If The Link Does Not Work The Essay is Below)

Randolph Schutz                                         Hamza Syed, Ana Bravo, Yann Herve

Psychology                                                                                              10/26/16

Midterm Paper

Harm does not only come from a hurtful act, it also come from inaction when a person requires aid. The world was stunned when twenty-nine-year-old Catherine Susan Genovese (Kitty Genovese) was murdered and raped outside her apartment building on March 13, 1964 while thirty-eight people in the building stood watch and did nothing. Another dreadful case of significant inaction occurred on October 27, 2009 when an unnamed female sophomore who was currently attending Richmond High was brutally assaulted and raped by ten men whilst over twenty witnesses stood watch and did nothing. Societies inaction is influenced through several factors ranging from The Bystander Apathy Effect to The Asch Effect. These factors influence the behavior, actions, and judgments made by individuals in society.  Social Psychology has explained and interpreted the causes of such inaction and societies indifference.

Bill Genovese (Catherine‚Äôs Brother) gives a personal documentary in ‚ÄúThe Witness‚ÄĚ, a film regarding the murder of Kitty Genovese. Kitty Genovese was driving home and parked her car at the Kew Gardens Railroad Station parking lot close to her apartment building while she was being following by her assailant Winston Moseley. Kitty Genovese was attacked twice by the same man at the Kew Gardens Railroad and the final time near her apartment building. On March 13, 1964 Kitty Genovese was stabbed to death between three and four in the morning and twice the bedroom lights of bystanders frightened the assailant away yet he came back to stab her again along with raping her. Reported by Martin Gansberg in the Times that Kitty‚Äôs screams were heard by dozens of neighbors all of which did nothing to help. Bill Genovese found contradicting reports regarding his sisters murder such that people yelled at the attacker, another held Kitty in her arms and another called the police. This reports were contradicting to the published report in the TIMES which was a very trusted source that made this case a phenomenon worldwide. Interviewed by Bill, Rasenberger (A Times editor who assigned the story) said ‚ÄúIf the story had been reported more accurately, it still would have been a two- or three-day, maybe even four-day story, but it would not have been a fifty-year story‚ÄĚ. It is considered that many of the witnesses had assumed that there was a drunken argument from The Old Bailey, a nearby bar or that it was a domestic conflict that was playing out in public or that it was some lovers fight but I believe that these are all lies. Thirty-Eight witnesses hearing the screams and witnessing a man rape and stab a woman several times within a long duration of at least thirty-minutes cannot be mistaken for anything else than what it is. I believe that Social Psychology plays and immense role in this inaction which leads me to the Bystander Apathy Effect. I believe that these thirty-eight witnesses were all bystanders who were influenced by a diffusion of responsibility which weakens a group member‚Äôs obligation to help and become personally involved. They believed that since the building was full of capable people who heard the screams that ‚Äúsurely someone else‚ÄĚ will help. The Diffusion of Responsibility effect grows stronger on a bystander when other people are present which makes the bystander believe that it is not their responsibility to help and that others will. I have observed this first hand when two men were threatening to beat another man in public and a crowd of at least twenty-five people formed. Within the crowd of people, I heard someone say ‚ÄúSomeone should call the police‚ÄĚ although no one did so and the crowd failed to act. The same thing happened in Kitty Genovese‚Äôs case when people who failed to intervene in the murder were observing and conforming to the behavior of other people who were doing nothing. Solomon Asch (1907-1996) developed the Asch Effect which states that the influence of a group majority has a major impact on the judgment of an individual which has become the classic illustration of conformity-(the tendency for people to adopt the behavior and opinions presented by other group members). The inaction of the witnesses of Kitty Genovese‚Äôs murder can be explained by the Asch Effect as the majority of the witnesses did nothing, the individuals made an unconscious judgment not to do anything although action was as simple as calling the police from the safety of their homes. Conformity caused the bystander witnesses at Kitty‚Äôs murder to adopt the behavior presented by the other bystanders which was complete inaction during the entirety of the crime. Social Roles also had part to play in the inaction of the witnesses in Kitty Genovese‚Äôs Murder as a social role defines the behavior that is expected of a person in a certain setting or situation. The thirty-eight inactive witnesses were bystanders who examined their social roles unconsciously and decided that it was not expected of them to help Kitty Genovese since no other person did in the same setting and situation. Another dreadful case which resembles The Genovese Murder shares similar behavior of inaction and failure to respond.

On October 27, 2009, an unidentified fifteen-year-old sophomore who attending Richmond High School was brutally assaulted, beaten and raped by ten men for two and a half hours during the High School Homecoming dance which was taking place in the school gymnasium. Ten witnesses stood around laughing and taking pictures with their cell phones and eventually the crowd number grew above twenty. No one among the crowd called police or alerted a security guard on campus who could have intervened in the situation. The assistant principal of the school had noticed several grown men standing near the scene of the crime whom did not have any identification badges (It was required). The Assistant principal ignored them completely and returned to his job. I believe that situationism which states that the environment can have effects on behavior and social norms at the time of the incident created the conformity that the crowd of witnesses experienced. The witnesses’ inaction may be considered as the social norm of the homecoming party such that a group of men having sex with a sophomore was not necessarily rape but the height of the party and the situationism assumed a party where anyone who called the police would be a party crasher and this created the conformity of inaction. Although these ideas are plausible it is very likely that the inaction of the crowd was caused by the diffusion of responsibility which would have weakened each group member’s obligation to help and become personally involved. The Asch Effect may have also influenced the crowd at the crime scene as the majority of the crowd did not act to aid the unidentified girl, individuals made a judgment not to aid the girl either.

The Murder Case of Catherine Susan Genovese (Kitty Genovese) and the case of rape and assault of the unidentified fifteen-year-old girl both have several similarities and differences. In both cases over twenty people witnessed the crimes yet not one person acted to aid either victims. The Bystander Apathy Effect applied to Genovese’s Murder and the Richmond High Rape since none of the witnesses acted due to reliance on other bystanders to act for them. The Diffusion of Responsibility was applied to both cases as groups in both incidents denied to believe it was their obligation to help since others would have helped in their place. Conformity had played a role in both cases as the thirty-eight witnesses adopted the behavior of inaction due to the behavior of inaction of the other residents in the building and this applied to the Richmond Rape Case where over twenty witnesses decided to adopt the behavior of inaction due to the inaction of the other members of the crowd. Finally, the Asch Effect impacted both groups of witnesses in both cases as the majority of both groups made the judgment not to aid either girls, the individuals left also made the same judgments influenced by the majority. A difference in each case was that the group of witnesses in Genovese’s Murder Case was further apart in separate apartments while the witnesses in The Richmond Rape Case were in a crowd immediately close to each-other. This impacts the witnesses in the Richmond Rape Case in a proprietary way because situationism assumed an environment where the witnesses were so close to each-other that the behavior of a single witness would have a more forceful impact on the behavior of another individual witness. Both cases were phenomenon’s worldwide in society and in Social Psychology.

Harm does not only come from a hurtful act, it also come from inaction when a person requires aid. The Murder and Rape of Catherine Susan Genovese stunned the world due to the circumstances surrounding the notorious case. The situation of the witnesses has been studied in Social Psychology and has been a significant contribution to Social Psychology by giving it a first-rate example of several theories and ideas. The Rape Case of Richmond High School has been a notorious case which could have ending in a more positive manner if social inaction did not spread. Both cases have been prime examples of inaction in society and how it spreads through people unconsciously through several different ways. Inaction of a single individual could impact an entire community and how it acts for the greater good.

Research Project – Group 9 (Personality)

Dr. Randolph Schutz                                                                                                                 (Hamza Syed)    (Tchoumta Tchouffa Yann Herve)    (Bravo Ana L)

Psychology 9/28/16

In Psychology, personality consists of the psychological qualities that bring continuity to an individual in different situations and at different times. According to the psycho-dynamic, humanistic and cognitive theories, personality is a continuously changing process that is shaped by our conscious and unconscious motives as well as our social interaction. According to the psycho-dynamic theories of personality, both conscious and unconscious motivations and the influence of our past experiences are what change our personalities. It is believed that the humanistic theories emphasize that it is our present ideologies and what we believe that is significant are what influences our personalities. Rather than clinical practice, research experimentation in psychology has developed the social-cognitive theories which is based on the idea that personality is influenced by learning and social interaction.¬†A member from this group (Ana Bravo) observed the social-cognitive theory of personality first hand when she had a very shy friend in school and that friend couldn’t make friends due to her shyness. For this reason her (Ana Bravo) friend was thought of as shy and queer by other kids at school. Eventually this friend socially interacted with other kids at school and she became outgoing and sociable in almost any group of kids. Social Interaction influenced her personality positively.

In theory the traits of an individual are more specific characteristics in the personality for example shyness which is inherited and some is learned through experience guides the individuals thoughts and actions under various conditions. Psychologists have developed the five factor theory which uses five traits Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neurotic-ism, and Openness to describe personalities of different individuals. The state of a person is a momentary emotional reaction in a certain situation which persists according to the level of the trigger (Frustration, Arousal, Anger). The character of a person is the overall sense of quality of that person (Honesty, Integrity, Generosity) which is taught or learned through observational learning and can be absorbed anytime throughout an individual’s lifetime. Although character can be taught, the inherited traits of an individual can permanently influence certain aspects of character because that is the individual’s inevitable nature.

Individuals in society make judgments about other peoples personalities in everyday life whether if its to determine friend and foe or to determine honesty and dishonesty. These judgments are part of the Implicit Personality Theory which states that people make assumptions about personality to simplify the task of understanding others. These Judgments are made very often in human interaction due to the fact the the human mind must create a profile through the implicit personality theory and combines traits together naively in creativity to develop an understanding of an individual. A member of this group (Yann Herve) gave an example of how he observed this theory when his friend told him about a girl at work who was rude and selfish based on the attitude she was emitting that specific day. The other day his (Yann Herve) same friend told him a contradicting report about the girl on how she was kind and pleasant because he got to know her better, a judgment made with more information rather that little the initial information he had the first time he met her.¬†These judgments are more likely to be made when an individual generalizes ignorantly for example if you had your heart broken by someone who was attractive but unwilling to make a commitment, you may quickly judge other attractive persons to be ‚Äúinsincere‚ÄĚ or ‚Äúuntrustworthy‚ÄĚ. It is often the case that when individuals make mistakes regarding other individuals, their judgments are revealed to them as errors. People are most likely to make such mistakes when they make judgments solely based on an individuals state or character at the time since these change frequently. General ideas about personality work to a certain extant in everyday life but personalities cannot truly be interpreted by the regular person.

The Psychoanalytic Theory developed by Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) revealed how hidden in the unconscious part of the mind is the source of powerful impulse, instincts, motives, and conflicts that energize the personality. The memories hidden in the unconscious can only be obtained through special techniques used by trained psychologists which reveal the reason for the subjects behavior or personality.  For example I observed this theory first hand in a matter when my older cousin fell into a depression which was being treated by a trained psychologist. He told of no apparent reason for his depression but the psychologist revealed to him that hidden in his unconscious was the memory of his dysfunctional parents that were always fighting as he grew up. It took time for him to finally make peace with that which was in his unconscious and he now lives peacefully independently. The use of this theory could tell us how an individual would act in emergencies because it would give us the individuals hidden secrets of the mind which would reveal his/her true personality and how it would apply in emergencies. How an individual would act in emergency situations is not assumable since it requires one to know the secrets of the unconscious and true personality rather than a certain state or character of the individual.

When things go wrong explanations based on the character or personality of the people involved typically dominate and this is the effect of the Fundamental Attribution Error. These explanations are almost never accurate at first since information regarding an incident is not equal as different people involved attribute false information or ideas due to ignorance regarding the incident. This does not inform us on what happened accurately because we have contradicting sides and this cannot guide us to do the right thing in unification since what was attributed was indirect and contradicting. In conclusion, Personality can take many forms of character or states but is always truly hidden within the unconscious and it takes the extreme for it to reveal itself.

 

Hamza Syed (Ideas and Contributions)

Compiled several ideas and theories that support the idea of personality being something that is hidden in the unconscious and how people make judgments on individuals in everyday Life. The Psychoanalytic Theory developed by Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) revealed how hidden in the unconscious part of the mind is the source of powerful impulse, instincts, motives, and conflicts that energize the personality. This theory that I researched was most interesting because it brought a sophisticated conclusion that personalities are hidden and can only be revealed through special techniques. For example I observed this theory first hand in a matter when my older cousin fell into a depression which was being treated by a trained psychologist. He told of no apparent reason for his depression but the psychologist revealed to him that hidden in his unconscious was the memory his dysfunctional parents that were always fighting as he grew up. It took time for him to finally make peace with that which was in his unconscious and he now lives peacefully independently.  People make judgments on other peoples personalities in everyday life according to what character they are greeting with or what in what state of behavior they met a person. (These are easily mistakes since true traits may only be revealed in certain extreme situations or circumstances).

Tchoumta Tchouffa Yann Herve (Ideas and Contributions)

Compiled theories and ideas regarding why and how people make judgement on other individuals in everyday life. The Implicit Personality Theory states that people make assumptions about personality to simplify the task of understanding others. These Judgments are made very often in human interaction due to the fact the the human mind must create a profile through the implicit personality theory and combines traits together naively in creativity to develop an understanding of an individual. A member from this group (Yann Herve) gave an example of how he observed this theory when his friend told him about a girl at work who was rude and selfish based on the attitude she was emitting that specific day. The other day his (Yann Herve) same friend told him a contradicting report about the girl on how she was kind and pleasant because he got to know her better, a judgment made with more information rather that little the initial information he had the first time he met her. The five factor theory used by psychologists contains Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neurotic-ism, and Openness as the traits to describe personalities of different individuals.

Ana Bravo (Ideas and Contributions)

Compiled three theories which are used by psychologists to define and explain at a scholarly level what influences and causes our personalities to change and form. ¬†According to the psycho-dynamic, humanistic and cognitive theories, personality is a continuously changing process that is shaped by our conscious and unconscious motives as well as our social interaction. According to the psycho-dynamic theories of personality, both conscious and unconscious motivations and the influence of our past experiences are what change our personalities. It is believed that the humanistic theories emphasize that it is our present ideologies and what we believe that is significant are what influences our personalities. Rather than clinical practice, research experimentation in psychology has developed the social-cognitive theories which is based on the idea that personality is influenced by learning and social interaction. A member from this group (Ana Bravo) observed the social-cognitive theory of personality first hand when she had a very shy friend in school and that friend couldn’t make friends due to her shyness. For this reason her (Ana Bravo) friend was thought of as shy and queer by other kids at school. Eventually this friend socially interacted with other kids at school and she became outgoing and sociable in almost any group of kids. Social Interaction influenced her personality positively.

 

(Professor, please note that these ideas and theories were combined using all our works  to create one unified research project) Thank You

Homework (Observation on Learning)

It has been recorded that positive reinforcement is a very effective way of learning for dogs and young children. Although punishment may be best suited for humans since they can develop and maintain a sophisticated understanding as to why they were punished and why what they did was wrong, dogs seem to be best suited for positive reinforcement due to their lack of understanding. I was visiting my friend’s house briefly and he owns a pug dog which seemed to be the perfect specimen for my positive reinforcement learning experiment. I started off clapping my hands and spreading my arms to indicate I wanted the dog to come into my arms but it was a failed attempt. The second time a held a dog treat in my hand while using the same motion and he came into my arms aiming for the treat. The third time I had no treat but did the same thing and he came into my arms expecting a treat so I gave on to him as a reward. This continued to work as long as I rewarded him with one treat.

Who: Me and my Friend’s Dog Toby.

Where: My friend’s house.

When: 9/10/16